- the changes in 3e to 4e are in no way 'larger' or lesser than the changes from AD&D to 3e. Perceptions are not facts.

- That is exactly what devs of 4e had to say: that alignment were restrictive to a good tabletop game. Hence they gae more freedom to DM unlike 3e. When 3e was released its criticism was that it took away the freedom and gave more stress to number crunching. 4e corrected that.

I agree about perception. In fact, the emphasis on number crunching in 3E makes it the least "authentic" edition of D&D in my perception. But, that's just my perception.

As far as Alignment goes, I recall hearing someone from WotC speaking once and they said that one of the biggest discussion points for any new edition has always been Alignment and whether or not to keep it. Their data suggested that it was the single most modified, ignored, or outright removed rule in D&D.

But, there is something so iconic about Lawful Good, Chaotic Evil, and so on. Then again, I remember when they were just Lawful or Chaotic and my character's "class" was Elf.

This game is definitely D&D. Anyone who has played 4th edition, for even one session, can clearly tell that this game is built around it as much as feasible for an MMO. Instead, what you have here are a bunch of people that played Neverwinter Nights, complaining because of a lack of similarity. Naturally this is absurd, because not only is this not a sequel to Neverwinter nights (thus being a completely different game), but it doesn't even follow third edition D&D rules!

And one thing I can promise above anything else there is absolutely No chance this game will be modified to resemble anything but fourth edition No matter how much anybody would prefer a different version.

And one thing I can promise above anything else there is absolutely No chance this game will be modified to resemble anything but fourth edition No matter how much anybody would prefer a different version.

This is a very important point to remember, more important than bickering about someone sensibly refusing to participate in a flamewar.

Not really. Pen and paper rules systems are designed for a style of play where you spend long periods of time talking to each other out loud, and then maybe once an hour there's a combat with a handful of characters. Even with the 4e "minion" rules, it's still about one combat an hour, and everything's balanced around that so that every three play sessions or so, you level up, gaining a full step in many things.

An MMORPG can't possibly work that way. People read vastly faster than they speak, your own interaction is going to be choosing from pre-set responses, and because a computer is handling the combat instead of people, you're going to have many combats in an hour. If it used D&D rules under the hood, combined with reading and computers doing the math, you'd hit level 30 in an afternoon.

If you instead nerfed all the XP so that everything else worked the same way but it took hours or days to level, you couldn't have gear upgrades, because a single point of increased AC or Strength or whatever is a HUGE impact on combat, so you'd have to sit in the same gear for days, with your only positive reinforcement being leveling up every few days. That simply wouldn't fly with an MMO audience.

Again, this is not D&D implemented in an MMO; this is an MMO based on D&D. It MUST use a finer-grained system for advancement. It must use a finer-grained system for statistics contributing to combat. It must give more frequent feelings of increase in capability, or it would just be a failed game that very few people would play.

It's D&D to the extent that "Gauntlegrym" is D&D, not to the extent that your house campaign is. Anything else isn't feasible in an MMORPG. Maybe somebody needs to make Neverwinter Nights 3; but this is an MMORPG. They're not going to decide not to make it one in the next couple of months.

Thats why I left "resemble" in there. You can justify Cryptic all day long and say that it's not possible but in the end we all know where they went wrong, why they did it and that it IS possible. DDO exists, it uses a d20 system, it's a MMO, deal with it.

I agree about perception. In fact, the emphasis on number crunching in 3E makes it the least "authentic" edition of D&D in my perception. But, that's just my perception.

I think one is entitled to say they didn't like 3e, I am not sure it's valid to say it was "inauthentic".

As someone who witnessed the birth of 3e while actually working at Wizards, I can tell you, great care was taken to keep the spirit of D&D intact. It was also a widely popular iteration that SAVED the brand, (which was in dire straights at the time). I no longer work for Wizards by the way, and haven't for a long time, just for the record.

One of the reasons Paizo has exploded with Pathfinder, is because of the loyalty 3e and 3.5 produced. Pathfinder is a great thing for that reason, in my opinion, because it provided more options, more competition, which is always a good thing in the marketplace. It's currently my preferred tabletop system right now, for the record.

Again, there are those that prefer 4e, or (yuck) 2e, or insist on going old school 1e (which I have a lot of nostalgia for, but I personally find unplayable nowadays).

So it's good you admit, we all have preferences and tastes in these things. That's what makes D&D great, it has a wide variety of ways to plays and rules to support them (and 5e will exploit this even more, as we'll soon see).

But in terms of "authenticity", call my quibble semantic if you want, but I don't see that as something a fan can judge. It's authentic if the stewards of the brand say its authentic. That's just how intellectual property works. You might hate the new Volkswagen GTI, but you can't debate that it's an "inauthentic" Volkswagen.

Just a minor point really, but one I felt compelled to make.

As for alignments, I tossed them out a long time ago on my table. I use the planes, (which are based on alignments) but even there, I muddy the water a little, but as a RP tool, they just didn't seem necessary.

All these things come down to taste and saying "I don't like Neverwinter Online" is valid, saying "4th Edition is the best D&D version ever made, in my opinion" is also perfectly valid.

Saying a product isn't authentic, or isn't really D&D, even though it's branded as Dungeons & Dragons by the very people that own the property, endorsed by them, supported by them and were vital in its design and approval, is just egotism.

We're all entitled to our opinion (and Lord knows I have lots of opinions), but facts are facts. They are stubborn things, facts.

Thats why I left "resemble" in there. You can justify Cryptic all day long and say that it's not possible but in the end we all know where they went wrong, why they did it and that it IS possible. DDO exists, it uses a d20 system, it's a MMO, deal with it.

Except it isn't. Under the hood, it's not a linear d20 system at all, it's way more fine-grained. AC is divided up into five stats. Neverwinter just lies about it less.